What Matters Most to Occupational Therapy Clinician Anatomy Instructors.

Kelly F Hennessy, Athena Kirou-Mauro, Erica Dove, Emily S Ho

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kelly F HennessyDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Rm 926, Toronto, ON M5G 1V7 Canada.

Athena Kirou-MauroDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Rm 926, Toronto, ON M5G 1V7 Canada.

Erica DoveTemerty Faculty of Medicine, Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada.

Emily S HoDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Rm 926, Toronto, ON M5G 1V7 Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4082-1770

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Occupational therapy (OT) clinicians express concerns of declining trainee knowledge of anatomy. Activity: Quality improvement project exploring OT clinician perspectives of optimal anatomy teaching approaches and assessments was conducted using survey and interview methods. Results: Clinical skills labs, surface anatomy labs/lectures, and anatomy prosection labs were identified as optimal teaching approaches, while preferred assessments were practical applied anatomy and clinical exams, and clinical skills/biomechanics. Thematic analysis of interviews found that clinicians value pedagogy that integrates clinical application across teaching and assessment methods. Discussion: OT clinician perspectives informed changes to a university's pedagogical approach to support integrated learning of anatomy.

Indexed as

Applied anatomyClinician instructorsGross anatomyOccupational therapyPedagogy

Identifiers

PMID40353042

DOI10.1007/s40670-024-02274-8

PMCPMC12058608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.